| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 1516 2006 SLD 1516 2006 PLD 354 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeals Nos. 122 and 123 of 2000, decision dated: 7-12-2005. (On appeal from the judgment dated 23-12-1999 of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Appeal No.13 of 1999 and Murder Reference No.3 of 1999).
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI AND TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, JJ
Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch.Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.A. No. 122 of 2000).Muhammad Saeed, Addl. A.G., N.W.F.P. and Mushtaq Ahmad Tahir Kheli, Advocate Supreme Court (in C.A. No. 122 of 2000).Mushtaq Ahmad
Criminal Appeals Nos. 122 and 123 of 2000, decision dated: 7-12-2005. (On appeal from the judgment dated 23-12-1999 of the Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Appeal No.13 of 1999 and Murder Reference No.3 of 1999).
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI AND TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, JJ
Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch.Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.A. No. 122 of 2000).Muhammad Saeed, Addl. A.G., N.W.F.P. and Mushtaq Ahmad Tahir Kheli, Advocate Supreme Court (in C.A. No. 122 of 2000).Mushtaq Ahmad
KHURRAM MALIK and others
VS
THE STATE and others . KHURRAM MALIK and others vs THE STATE and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 164---Criminal trial---Confessional statement of accused---Scope---Accused got recorded his statement on the day following his arrest but in Court proceedings, in his statement under S.342 Cr.P.C.,. he denied recording of confession along with recovery of incriminating evidence--Effect---Voluntariness of confessional statement under S.164 Cr.P.C. of accused could be adjudged if it was recorded without unexplained delay after his arrest---As recovery of incriminating evidence was duly established against accused, his confessional statement also got strong corroboration from the same---Such confessional statement could be used against the accused. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 164---Qanun-e-Shahadt (10 of 1984), Art.43---Circumstantial evidence---Confessional statement---Accused committed offence of murder in presence of two ladies---After the arrest of accused, his confessional statement was recorded---Both the ladies in their confessional statements also did not deny happening of the incident---Effect---Statements of the ladies could also be considered as circumstance against the accused in terms of Art.43 of Qanun-e-Shahadt, 1984. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S.302---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 410---Sentence, reduction in---Failure to give reasons---Trial Court at the conclusion of trial, awarded death penalty but High Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction, reduced the sentence to that of imprisonment for life---High Court agreed with the findings recorded by Trial, Court concerning commission of offence by convict but had expressed its reservation only on the quantum of the sentence---Validity---Appellate Court (High Court) was legally empowered to record its own findings but subject to furnishing the reply of reasons advanced by Trial Court for the purpose of not awarding normal penalty of death to accused under S.302, P.P.C. Abdul Subhan v. Rahim Bukhsh and others PLD 1994 SC 178 rel. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- --S. 302---Motive---Scope---Motive is always known to accused who commits the crime and there are cases where it is not possible to disclose the same…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492